Accessible Toilets

[WarOnWomen]

I've just seen this thread by Fair Play for Women regarding their stance on toilets. Maya F is also on the thread clarifying the issue.

twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1312062467191734273?s=21

They are saying that everyone should be comfortable choosing the toilets they want to without being forced to share with opposite sex. Yup. Trans people should also not have to share with people designated at birth. Yup, also agree. Have a mix sex category for people who don't mind and trans people. Sure.

They are saying these facilities already exist. Accessible toilets. This is where I feel lost and let down. These toilets are for disabled people. People worked hard to get these accessible toilets. I don't want my mum having to share these toilets with trans women, anymore than I want them in female spaces. It's just wrong. And don't disabled people have a say as part of the EA2010?

Please tell me I have the wrong end of the stick.

Ugh, yeah, it means they're accessible for anyone with a disability who can't use the "normal" toilets. Not for anyone who doesn't want to use the facilities provided for their sex.
I'm sick of seeing that on AIBU, loads of people saying "accessible means they're for anyone." 😡😡😡 They're accessible for DISABLED PEOPLE, you know because they can't access the facilities you can.

They've got this really wrong. They're not disabled, yet here they are giving away our spaces.
Don't they see the irony? They're doing to disabled people what they complain men are doing to women.

I agree that the accessible toilets are not for people who don't need to use them.

I suppose there is an argument that if a male person is sufficiently distressed by using single-sex toilets with other men then they have a mental health issue which means they need separate facilities and the accessible ones would be appropriate then.

In general it is up to people who aren't happy using single-sex spaces appropriate to their sex to campaign for extra mixed-sex/individual toilets.

Yeah, that's not on at all.

I've always thought that we should have to have all existing disabled toilets upgraded to Changing Places standards where remotely possible, and then an additional similar one mandated in new buildings/spaces with larger provision, available for anyone who wants to use it. I don't think it should be designated trans (because yes, that would be demeaning) - but one that is available to anyone who may not want to use single sex provision, or cubicle spaces. People with invisible disabilities, people who identify as non-binary, transmen who don't pass and don't feel safe in men's provision, transwomen unsafe in men's, and any who feel their dysphoria would be exacerbated. It would also increase the availability of disability-usable toilets for those who don't have a wheelchair, and it would be a real boon for parents of opposite sex kids - especially fathers with girls - and parents with really small kids.

I agree it's completely unacceptable to just co-opt existing disabled provision. But once upon a time, disabled loos were a pipe dream, and now they're the norm. Private space toilets, as an addition, could be, too. And they could be made family friendly - we've all had the experience of trying to wrestle baby, toddler and pram in a normal shared toilet space, and the relief of a 'family toilet'. They could mandate proper changing provision in the additional one, which would help a lot of people out.

Everyone would win.

I suspect it's a bit of calling people's bluff, if people are genuinely simply wanting to go about their life and pee when necessary this 3rd space idea would be welcomed.

I don't want my mum having to share these toilets with trans women

Well she won't , will she ? Given they are all single occupancy rooms.

They're accessible for DISABLED PEOPLE, you know because they can't access the facilities you can

I don't have any mobility issues but I'm entitled to use these toilets. Are you the sort of person who will challenge why I'm using them because I don't look disabled?

People with hidden disabilities, people with buggies, people who needed to be accompanied by the opposite sex carer or parent, people who want to keep their birth sex private

I just looked at the thread - this is not what disabled loos are for, other than the 1st. At all. If you have kids, that's no fucking reason in and of itself to use a disabled loo.

@DidoLamenting

I don't want my mum having to share these toilets with trans women

Well she won't , will she ? Given they are all single occupancy rooms.

They're accessible for DISABLED PEOPLE, you know because they can't access the facilities you can

I don't have any mobility issues but I'm entitled to use these toilets. Are you the sort of person who will challenge why I'm using them because I don't look disabled?

Oh FSS. People using disabled loos for hidden disabilities is of course absolutely fine. The point is, they are for disabled people.

I don't want my mum having to share these toilets with trans women

Your mum already uses disabled toilets that both men and women use. So what difference does it make, if they're trans or not? Disabled loos are individual. Either sex can use them, alone.

I actually have no problem with trans people (or people with buggies, or several children..) using accessible toilets. I just wish there were more of them but the blame for that isn't on trans people.

Sorry, just saw your clarification, and I agree. I'd add that parents have no right to access them either.

@testing987654321

I suspect it's a bit of calling people's bluff, if people are genuinely simply wanting to go about their life and pee when necessary this 3rd space idea would be welcomed.

I agree.

@wellbehavedwomen

People with hidden disabilities, people with buggies, people who needed to be accompanied by the opposite sex carer or parent, people who want to keep their birth sex private

I just looked at the thread - this is not what disabled loos are for, other than the 1st. At all. If you have kids, that's no fucking reason in and of itself to use a disabled loo.

Absolutely 100% agree.

Look, there are female, male, disabled toilets and even parent and baby toilets. Adding unisex loos is it insurmountable, especially in new builds. Or fully enclosed toilets in old buildings.

@Juniperandrage

I actually have no problem with trans people (or people with buggies, or several children..) using accessible toilets. I just wish there were more of them but the blame for that isn't on trans people.

This is why we need family/accessible toilets that are for families, or non-binary people, or those with hidden disabilities fed up with being challenged, or trans people, or just someone who hates cubicled options, to use. As an addition to Places standard toilets, which is the level all disabled ones should be mandated to attain, if practicable.

A lot of people could benefit. And it would reduce pressure on the disabled provision, too.

I can’t see the problem with trans people using single occupancy accessible toilets. Unlike when they use female toilets, it has no effect on anyone else so I can’t see why anyone would object.

Being trans seems a fair reason to not use single sex spaces, so they are included in the group that accessible toilets are designed for.

The thing that blows my mind with this: you don't combat demands that you sacrifice your own provisions and rights, by pointing to another, very seriously disadvantaged group, and saying, "No, take theirs."

Really shocked by this from FPFW. The inherent hypocrisy of the suggestion should be obvious.

@wellbehavedwomen

The thing that blows my mind with this: you don't combat demands that you sacrifice your own provisions and rights, by pointing to another, very seriously disadvantaged group, and saying, "No, take theirs."

Really shocked by this from FPFW. The inherent hypocrisy of the suggestion should be obvious.

And Maya tbh, if she thinks the same.

I can’t see the problem with trans people using single occupancy accessible toilets. Unlike when they use female toilets, it has no effect on anyone else so I can’t see why anyone would object.

Uh, hello, "no effect on anyone else" - do disabled people not count then?

OP completely agree.

They have got this one wrong.

I think that unless the toilet specifically says it is a shared facility for baby changing, it should not be assumed that it can be used by anyone.

There are too few accessible facilities as it is, and the problem is even worse for women with disabilities.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/06/disabled-women-surgery-catheter-accessible-toilets

We need more accessible toilets, not more people using accessible toilets. It's ridiculous to suggest that adequate facilities already exist.

And how did parents in that situation manage before there were disabled toilets then?

Badly, by using the end toilet with the door open or similar. Proper family facilities are needed as well as accessible ones. New buildings/refurbs should be able to include this.

I'm not on twitter, so can't comment, but I really hope FPFW delete this tweet.

"Great thing is these facilities already exist" is just wrong.

merry mouse it's a whole thread, not just this tweet. You can see it if you go on link.

They're accessible for DISABLED PEOPLE, you know because they can't access the facilities you can

The text below is from government guidelines on how to refer to people with disabilities. You might benefit from reading it.

Don’t automatically refer to ‘disabled people’ in all communications – many people who need disability benefits and services don’t identify with this term. Consider using ‘people with health conditions or impairments’ if it seems more appropriate

I have a health condition which is not obvious. I can easily access ordinary loos but if I want or need greater privacy I am entitled to and occasionally use the accessible facilities. I am not a "disabled person".

www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-communication/inclusive-language-words-to-use-and-avoid-when-writing-about-disability